# What if Hitler..?



## Bombsii (Mar 20, 2009)

(sorry I put it here, is it right here?)

If Hitler hadnt declared war on Poland history would of turned out much different.
So,I was wondering what do you think would of happened if Hitler hadn't declared war on Poland:
would he of died of old age?,would he have been killed by the freedom fighters?,would we know about the holocaust?,how would the world be different from the one we know today?

[Got off another forum]


----------



## Zeph (Mar 20, 2009)

Technically, every decision changes history, even if it's by an unnoticeable amount, so yes, if he hadn't made a major decision such as that the world would probably be very different.


----------



## Jetx (Mar 20, 2009)

It's pretty much impossible to even try to imagine.


----------



## goldenquagsire (Mar 20, 2009)

Hrm. The idea's interesting, but I would criticise the choice of turning point. Although the invasion of Poland was the official reason for the outbreak of World War II, it was near inevitable anyway. Hitler had been annexing lands for years prior; the major reason that Britain hadn't done anything about it earlier was that they needed time to rearm and prepare for war.

I'd say that a war would have broken out sooner or later. I suppose Hitler may have had a chance at lasting a few years longer, but the USSR would be a major obstacle to that hegemony.


----------



## Celestial Blade (Mar 20, 2009)

It would be MUCH better!


----------



## OrangeAipom (Mar 20, 2009)

goldenquagsire said:


> Hitler had been annexing lands for years prior; the major reason that Britain hadn't done anything about it earlier was that they needed time to rearm and prepare for war.


If Hitler died during the Great War, then he wouldn't be there to annex things.


----------



## Vladimir Putin's LJ (Mar 20, 2009)

my mum's car wouldn't exist ;;


----------



## Harlequin (Mar 20, 2009)

goldenquagsire said:


> Hrm. The idea's interesting, but I would criticise the choice of turning point. Although the invasion of Poland was the official reason for the outbreak of World War II, it was near inevitable anyway. Hitler had been annexing lands for years prior; the major reason that Britain hadn't done anything about it earlier was that they needed time to rearm and prepare for war.
> 
> I'd say that a war would have broken out sooner or later. I suppose Hitler may have had a chance at lasting a few years longer, but the USSR would be a major obstacle to that hegemony.


No, Britain hadn't gone to war by this point because Germany was merely walking into its own back yard, so to speak. The reoccupation of the Rhineland was German troops going into German land (and who cares about that? It's German land, after all), Anschluss with Austria was pretty much Germans uniting with Germans (and the principle of self-determination was a pretty big Treaty of Versailles point) and the annexation of the Sudetenland was again simply Germans being reunited with Germans.

Well. When Hitler invaded the _rest_ of Czechoslovakia Britian was readying her troops, but before that nothing would have been done. I think a better "what if" would be "what if Germany hadn't attacked the USSR?"

Everyone agreed that fighting a war on two fronts was a _huge_ no-no for Germany (see: WWI) but Hitler, in his infinite and drug-addled wisdom, decided that an attack on the USSR was necessary when he hadn't taken the UK out of the war. A far better decision on his part would have been to eliminate the UK threat and then go on to fight the Russians.

And don't get me started on the declaration of war on the USA - that was a stupid decision if there ever was one.


----------



## Vladimir Putin's LJ (Mar 20, 2009)

Reading books about/by soldiers concerning WWII is great but so depressing at the same time. You guys had the worst equipment/training/home guard ever.
Just feel lucky you're an island :v

Still that goddamn home guard, haha.

And yeah if Germany had continued to be allied to Russia then we'd all be speaking ze deutsch.


----------



## Harlequin (Mar 20, 2009)

Vladimir Putin's LJ said:


> Reading books about/by soldiers concerning WWII is great but so depressing at the same time. You guys had the worst equipment/training/home guard ever.
> Just feel lucky you're an island :v
> 
> Still that goddamn home guard, haha.


Well we still won >:( plus by the end of the war we were all awesome and stuff. >:(


----------



## Storm Earth and Fire (Mar 20, 2009)

Well, he could've continued building up until 1945 and started the war then. Germany could be notably stronger. Heck, he could've even aided Mussolini's war in Yugoslavia and Greece in the meantime, with minimal response from the UK and France, which was a stumbling block to the Eastern Front in our timeline. Then, in 1945, finally invade Poland.

Going along...

What if Hitler died in the July 20th plot and the resulting military dictatorship secured separate peace with the Western Allies?

What if the French made the first move on the Western Front and invaded the Saarland? Their strength along the border were estimated to have been almost twice as much as the German side, IIRC. They did launch an expedition, but pulled out soon after.

What if Albert Einstein constructed a time machine and used it to go back to 1920s Germany and kill Hitler?


----------



## Tailsy (Mar 20, 2009)

Who cares, it's already happened.


----------



## Storm Earth and Fire (Mar 20, 2009)

Well, I don't know about anybody else here, but I'm a bit of a history nerd, so I think of stuff like this from time to time.

And I read a lot of alternate history novels.


----------



## goldenquagsire (Mar 21, 2009)

Tailsy said:


> Who cares, it's already happened.


You're boring. ):



> No, Britain hadn't gone to war by this point because Germany was merely walking into its own back yard, so to speak. The reoccupation of the Rhineland was German troops going into German land (and who cares about that? It's German land, after all), Anschluss with Austria was pretty much Germans uniting with Germans (and the principle of self-determination was a pretty big Treaty of Versailles point) and the annexation of the Sudetenland was again simply Germans being reunited with Germans.


I was always under the impression that this was the official stance - i.e. "yeah suuure what Germany is doing is fine and dandy and it's all cool" - whereas the British government was actually aware that this was a sign of bad things to come.



> Well. When Hitler invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia Britian was readying her troops, but before that nothing would have been done. I think a better "what if" would be "what if Germany hadn't attacked the USSR?"


I'd say this is another one of those inevitable things. Germany and Russian hated each other, and they'd see each other as a threat to the other's power. War between them would've happened at some point.


----------



## Harlequin (Mar 21, 2009)

Of course war was inevitable between Germany and Russia - Hitler wanted the Eastern European lebensraum. But if he had _waited_ to attack Russia he might have won the war. And as for Britain ... no, the policy of appeasement was actually serious. "Oh, it's okay, they're just bringing Germans back into Germay. That's fair!" 

I mean it _was_ mostly because Britain didn't want a war but they did think there was nothing wrong with it.


----------



## Lady Grimdour (Mar 21, 2009)

Harlequin said:


> Of course war was inevitable between Germany and Russia - Hitler wanted the Eastern European lebensraum. But if he had _waited_ to attack Russia he might have won the war. And as for Britain ... no, the policy of appeasement was actually serious. "Oh, it's okay, they're just bringing Germans back into Germay. That's fair!"
> 
> I mean it _was_ mostly because Britain didn't want a war but they did think there was nothing wrong with it.


Actually, if Hitler had waited to attack Russia, he would have still lost. The German army attacked just a fair bit after Stalin purged his military of any potential traitors, which included 3 of his 5 generals, leaving a large amount of the Soviet army without a head and the rest paranoid of Stalin's watchful eye. The only reason Hitler lost against Russia was because of the Five Year Plan prior which gave the Soviets the KV-2, and the Nazi army coming unprepared for the Russian winters.

If Germany had waited, it would have given the Soviets time to properly train its soldiers and rebuild the army and if anything, it would have made the war much easier for the Allies.


----------



## Dannichu (Mar 21, 2009)

EVERYONE.

Read this book. 

It's about what would've happened if someone went back in time and put sterilisation tablets into Hilter's parent's drinking water, and how different everything would be were Hitler not born. I don't want to spoil it, but it covers the "What if...?" question magnificently.

Plus, it's by Stephen Fry <3


----------



## King Clam (Mar 21, 2009)

I believe the focus has switched more to "How could Hitler have won".

Keeping the Japanese on a tighter leash and not getting the US involved would've helped, I think. I also wonder how much trouble Germany would've had in Russia if it had been a summer invasion.


----------



## Harlequin (Mar 21, 2009)

Grimdour The Desecrater said:


> Actually, if Hitler had waited to attack Russia, he would have still lost. The German army attacked just a fair bit after Stalin purged his military of any potential traitors, which included 3 of his 5 generals, leaving a large amount of the Soviet army without a head and the rest paranoid of Stalin's watchful eye. The only reason Hitler lost against Russia was because of the Five Year Plan prior which gave the Soviets the KV-2, and the Nazi army coming unprepared for the Russian winters.
> 
> If Germany had waited, it would have given the Soviets time to properly train its soldiers and rebuild the army and if anything, it would have made the war much easier for the Allies.


I think Hitler could have won the war if he'd just eliminated the British first. The French were conquered and Britain was really the only power left fighting. If Germany had kept her attention on the British and really tried to destroy us they might have been able to, leaving them a one-front war. If they had then freed the women to fulfil traditionally male roles (in certain industries) they would have then had many more soldiers.

Couple this with getting rid of the slave labour and forcing conquered peoples to fight in your army and Hitler might well have succeeded. Also, Stalingrad. Stalingrad was a disaster. Idiot man. :(


----------



## Storm Earth and Fire (Mar 21, 2009)

Harlequin said:


> Of course war was inevitable between Germany and Russia - Hitler wanted the Eastern European lebensraum. But if he had _waited_ to attack Russia he might have won the war.


As Grimdour pointed out, that would've allowed the Soviets time to bring their army up to speed, which it definitely was not in 1940.

But also, that would've given them even less time before the winter struck.

The only good time to attack would've been summer. In spring the largely unpaved roads of the Soviet Union would've stopped any advance. If Germany could've launched Barbarossa in May, the Soviet Union could've been pushed to the brink of defeat because the Heer would have enough time to reach their objectives before the Russian winter doomed them.

However, Barbarossa was delayed to June due to Mussolini's trouble with Yugoslavia and Greece.

Also useful might've been an actual Finnish offensive south into Leningrad, but the President of Finland had already proclaimed that the capture of Leningrad was not a Finnish objective.

Unfortunately for Hitler, the Battle of Britain was lost, dooming Operation Sealion.


----------



## Lady Grimdour (Mar 21, 2009)

Harlequin said:


> I think Hitler could have won the war if he'd just eliminated the British first. The French were conquered and Britain was really the only power left fighting. If Germany had kept her attention on the British and really tried to destroy us they might have been able to, leaving them a one-front war. If they had then freed the women to fulfil traditionally male roles (in certain industries) they would have then had many more soldiers.
> 
> Couple this with getting rid of the slave labour and forcing conquered peoples to fight in your army and Hitler might well have succeeded. Also, Stalingrad. Stalingrad was a disaster. Idiot man. :(


Good point.

If the Nazi government had gone with the Deep Strike tactic similar to the Soviets of past, they would have conquered Britain, bolstered their defenses against the Americans THEN drilled towards Moscow. This would mean that America would have had to save Britain from the Germans, which meant that Japan could expand and collect resources without any important threats. Since the Soviet army never knew about the Eastern front, this would have given the Axis powers a massive advantage.

If things had gone as per the first stages of Barbarossa, the Soviets would have moved their factories east, and their army to the west, leaving a giant hole for the Japanese army to crush. The east would surely fall due to a lack of defenses, then Russia would have no military to speak of, and they can corner Russia easily.


----------

